Yeah, but the $750+ penalty was mandated because the damages from the distribution were too hard to calculate (the idea there being that they are holding person A responsible for the downloading of B and C, plus whoever downloads from them, and so on, and so on). The fine is based on the idea that if you downloaded, you probably distributed too.
They are selling DRM-free MP3 files. I don't know if it is the entire catalogue or not, but they are selling them. Of course, last I knew, they were selling them for a higher price than the (mostly) OS agnostic Amazon MP3 store, which only sells DRM-free MP3s, at the same bitrate as iTunes is using for their DRM-free stuff.
Well, with the DRM, there is the issue of support. Mainly, can the DRM'd file play on my computer. Not everyone is running the latest and "greatest" insofar as Windows is concerned, or even what is a generation behind that. Heck, a lot of people don't even use Windows.
The issue isn't that she signed up with a fake name. Hell, there ARE consequences in place for that. They merely ban her ass from their site, and then that is it. The issue is the fact that there are not only criminal charges being filed, but truly excessive ones. This in no way warrants a FELONY charge, much the less 3 of them at a maximum 5 years per charge.
The fact that Microsoft provided no way to REMOVE the browser from the OS was part of the issue as well. They then claimed that there was no way to remove IE from the Operating System and have it still function. Then, someone was brought into court who proved them showed a copy of Windows 98 without IE (although whether you think his methods and the end result count or not as what it claims to be is a different discussion altogether).
We already agree that the guy's right to free speech doesn't even apply to the murders. However,insofar as the capital punishment, that is a different story (but it is an issue of should it/shouldn't it, not what for).
Verizon isn't blocking anything, they are just not going to carry anything that isn't from the big 8 ON THEIR OWN SERVERS. That is all they are doing. There is no attempted blocking, no attempted fuck big brotherism, nothing. Anyone who was using the Verizon server can simply use another one (pay or free) and suddenly they have access to all the stuff (legitimate and non) that used to be available from the Verizon server. All that really happened is Cuomo wanted to look good to voters, picked an issue you can't lose (politically) with, started talking to several ISPs, and then they decided that even though what the guy wanted wouldn't solve anything, giving him something to make him happy wouldn't actually hurt anyone, so they said sure. This little bit of theater makes Cuomo look good, it makes the ISPs look good to the (mostly non usenet-using) public, and in actuality doesn't hurt anyone.
Slashdot Mirror
The issue with the books wasn't one or two pages for reference or other purposes, it was the fact that it was the whole book.
And rightfully so, I might add. For anyone who is wondering why, just google Night of the Living Dead.
Yeah, but the $750+ penalty was mandated because the damages from the distribution were too hard to calculate (the idea there being that they are holding person A responsible for the downloading of B and C, plus whoever downloads from them, and so on, and so on). The fine is based on the idea that if you downloaded, you probably distributed too.
This is /., that would have to be "+50 +site admin rights +infinite mod points for life +user ID number reduction trite cynicism."
...into people claiming that everything is the fault of one party or the other and that all members of one of the two parties are corrupt.
They are selling DRM-free MP3 files. I don't know if it is the entire catalogue or not, but they are selling them. Of course, last I knew, they were selling them for a higher price than the (mostly) OS agnostic Amazon MP3 store, which only sells DRM-free MP3s, at the same bitrate as iTunes is using for their DRM-free stuff.
Well, with the DRM, there is the issue of support. Mainly, can the DRM'd file play on my computer. Not everyone is running the latest and "greatest" insofar as Windows is concerned, or even what is a generation behind that. Heck, a lot of people don't even use Windows.
IANAL, and I just might be wrong, but last I knew, it was only government entities that were bound by unlawful search claims.
Well, if a quarter of what is on that blog is true, then it is pretty apparent that they are trying to shut it up and not fix anything.
Could have been referring to the long, pointy type...
I am using a WRT54G (with Linksys' official firmware, of course the CURRENT VERSION) and can't remember the last time I had to reboot it.
Cowpat, I thought the line was "Bunker Gap."
Can someone post a link?
...made up by the Telegraph, can someone explain to me exactly how this isn't labeling a kid because his parents have a limited palette?
Well, with an older computer like that, you might have been better off murdering gnome/nautilus and shoving something a little lighter on there.
The issue isn't that she signed up with a fake name. Hell, there ARE consequences in place for that. They merely ban her ass from their site, and then that is it. The issue is the fact that there are not only criminal charges being filed, but truly excessive ones. This in no way warrants a FELONY charge, much the less 3 of them at a maximum 5 years per charge.
The fact that Microsoft provided no way to REMOVE the browser from the OS was part of the issue as well. They then claimed that there was no way to remove IE from the Operating System and have it still function. Then, someone was brought into court who proved them showed a copy of Windows 98 without IE (although whether you think his methods and the end result count or not as what it claims to be is a different discussion altogether).
...although not sure to classify it as FUD, but wondering if anyone else out there has similar stories?
We already agree that the guy's right to free speech doesn't even apply to the murders. However,insofar as the capital punishment, that is a different story (but it is an issue of should it/shouldn't it, not what for).
Verizon isn't blocking anything, they are just not going to carry anything that isn't from the big 8 ON THEIR OWN SERVERS. That is all they are doing. There is no attempted blocking, no attempted fuck big brotherism, nothing. Anyone who was using the Verizon server can simply use another one (pay or free) and suddenly they have access to all the stuff (legitimate and non) that used to be available from the Verizon server. All that really happened is Cuomo wanted to look good to voters, picked an issue you can't lose (politically) with, started talking to several ISPs, and then they decided that even though what the guy wanted wouldn't solve anything, giving him something to make him happy wouldn't actually hurt anyone, so they said sure. This little bit of theater makes Cuomo look good, it makes the ISPs look good to the (mostly non usenet-using) public, and in actuality doesn't hurt anyone.
Out of curiosity, do you know if those releases of the books are edited in interesting ways?
I wonder if those missing features were not included for speeds sake or because the developers of EDE didn't think that they were important.
Not even they are going to implement it until the next full office release. You have to admit, that says a lot about the standard.
It does, but the annoyance is that I have to SSH in and use VI to get the streams in in the first place.
Someone on the Chumby forums suggested the same thing, and it didn't work for me for some reason.